[compiler] Fewer assumptions about nonmutability when change detection enabled #30180
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…n enabled Summary: Change detection is desgined to determine whether rules of react have been violated, and to do so better we need to loosen Forgets assumptions about what kinds of values don't need to be memoized. For example, the compiler typically doesn't think of `o.x` as something that needs to be memoized, because it does not allocate. However, we want to compare `o.x` in the current render with `o.x` in a previous one, so we now insert a "memoization" (comparison, really) block around this value. [ghstack-poisoned]
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎
|
This was referenced Jul 2, 2024
|
Comparing: 100dfd7...e1aa6b7 Critical size changesIncludes critical production bundles, as well as any change greater than 2%:
Significant size changesIncludes any change greater than 0.2%: Expand to show
|
…ge detection enabled" Summary: Change detection is desgined to determine whether rules of react have been violated, and to do so better we need to loosen Forgets assumptions about what kinds of values don't need to be memoized. For example, the compiler typically doesn't think of `o.x` as something that needs to be memoized, because it does not allocate. However, we want to compare `o.x` in the current render with `o.x` in a previous one, so we now insert a "memoization" (comparison, really) block around this value. [ghstack-poisoned]
…ge detection enabled" Summary: Change detection is desgined to determine whether rules of react have been violated, and to do so better we need to loosen Forgets assumptions about what kinds of values don't need to be memoized. For example, the compiler typically doesn't think of `o.x` as something that needs to be memoized, because it does not allocate. However, we want to compare `o.x` in the current render with `o.x` in a previous one, so we now insert a "memoization" (comparison, really) block around this value. [ghstack-poisoned]
josephsavona
approved these changes
Jul 11, 2024
mvitousek
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 18, 2024
… may have changed between renders Summary: Change detection is desgined to determine whether rules of react have been violated, and to do so better we need to loosen Forgets assumptions about what kinds of values don't need to be memoized. For example, the compiler typically doesn't think of o.x as something that needs to be memoized, because it does not allocate. However, we want to compare o.x in the current render with o.x in a previous one, so we now insert a "memoization" (comparison, really) block around this value. The structure of this work is that we now add a reactive scope for identifiers if they originate from any instruction that could read from state that could have mutated between renders. This means that `LoadProperty` is always going to get a reactive scope; `LoadGlobal` will get a scope if we're not reading from something mutable, and `PrefixUpdate` won't (because the variable being incremented would have already been loaded and checked). Supersedes #30180. [ghstack-poisoned]
mvitousek
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 18, 2024
…ctive scopes to values that may have changed between renders" Summary: Change detection is desgined to determine whether rules of react have been violated, and to do so better we need to loosen Forgets assumptions about what kinds of values don't need to be memoized. For example, the compiler typically doesn't think of o.x as something that needs to be memoized, because it does not allocate. However, we want to compare o.x in the current render with o.x in a previous one, so we now insert a "memoization" (comparison, really) block around this value. The structure of this work is that we now add a reactive scope for identifiers if they originate from any instruction that could read from state that could have mutated between renders. This means that `LoadProperty` is always going to get a reactive scope; `LoadGlobal` will get a scope if we're not reading from something mutable, and `PrefixUpdate` won't (because the variable being incremented would have already been loaded and checked). Supersedes #30180. [ghstack-poisoned]
mvitousek
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 18, 2024
…values that may have changed between renders" Summary: Change detection is desgined to determine whether rules of react have been violated, and to do so better we need to loosen Forgets assumptions about what kinds of values don't need to be memoized. For example, the compiler typically doesn't think of o.x as something that needs to be memoized, because it does not allocate. However, we want to compare o.x in the current render with o.x in a previous one, so we now insert a "memoization" (comparison, really) block around this value. The structure of this work is that we now add a reactive scope for identifiers if they originate from any instruction that could read from state that could have mutated between renders. This means that `LoadProperty` is always going to get a reactive scope; `LoadGlobal` will get a scope if we're not reading from something mutable, and `PrefixUpdate` won't (because the variable being incremented would have already been loaded and checked). Supersedes #30180. [ghstack-poisoned]
mvitousek
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 18, 2024
…ctive scopes to values that may have changed between renders" Summary: Change detection is desgined to determine whether rules of react have been violated, and to do so better we need to loosen Forgets assumptions about what kinds of values don't need to be memoized. For example, the compiler typically doesn't think of o.x as something that needs to be memoized, because it does not allocate. However, we want to compare o.x in the current render with o.x in a previous one, so we now insert a "memoization" (comparison, really) block around this value. The structure of this work is that we now add a reactive scope for identifiers if they originate from any instruction that could read from state that could have mutated between renders. This means that `LoadProperty` is always going to get a reactive scope; `LoadGlobal` will get a scope if we're not reading from something mutable, and `PrefixUpdate` won't (because the variable being incremented would have already been loaded and checked). Supersedes #30180. [ghstack-poisoned]
mvitousek
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 18, 2024
…values that may have changed between renders" Summary: Change detection is desgined to determine whether rules of react have been violated, and to do so better we need to loosen Forgets assumptions about what kinds of values don't need to be memoized. For example, the compiler typically doesn't think of o.x as something that needs to be memoized, because it does not allocate. However, we want to compare o.x in the current render with o.x in a previous one, so we now insert a "memoization" (comparison, really) block around this value. The structure of this work is that we now add a reactive scope for identifiers if they originate from any instruction that could read from state that could have mutated between renders. This means that `LoadProperty` is always going to get a reactive scope; `LoadGlobal` will get a scope if we're not reading from something mutable, and `PrefixUpdate` won't (because the variable being incremented would have already been loaded and checked). Supersedes #30180. [ghstack-poisoned]
mvitousek
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 18, 2024
…ctive scopes to values that may have changed between renders" Summary: Change detection is desgined to determine whether rules of react have been violated, and to do so better we need to loosen Forgets assumptions about what kinds of values don't need to be memoized. For example, the compiler typically doesn't think of o.x as something that needs to be memoized, because it does not allocate. However, we want to compare o.x in the current render with o.x in a previous one, so we now insert a "memoization" (comparison, really) block around this value. The structure of this work is that we now add a reactive scope for identifiers if they originate from any instruction that could read from state that could have mutated between renders. This means that `LoadProperty` is always going to get a reactive scope; `LoadGlobal` will get a scope if we're not reading from something mutable, and `PrefixUpdate` won't (because the variable being incremented would have already been loaded and checked). Supersedes #30180. [ghstack-poisoned]
mvitousek
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 18, 2024
…values that may have changed between renders" Summary: Change detection is desgined to determine whether rules of react have been violated, and to do so better we need to loosen Forgets assumptions about what kinds of values don't need to be memoized. For example, the compiler typically doesn't think of o.x as something that needs to be memoized, because it does not allocate. However, we want to compare o.x in the current render with o.x in a previous one, so we now insert a "memoization" (comparison, really) block around this value. The structure of this work is that we now add a reactive scope for identifiers if they originate from any instruction that could read from state that could have mutated between renders. This means that `LoadProperty` is always going to get a reactive scope; `LoadGlobal` will get a scope if we're not reading from something mutable, and `PrefixUpdate` won't (because the variable being incremented would have already been loaded and checked). Supersedes #30180. [ghstack-poisoned]
mvitousek
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 26, 2024
…ctive scopes to values that may have changed between renders" Summary: Change detection is desgined to determine whether rules of react have been violated, and to do so better we need to loosen Forgets assumptions about what kinds of values don't need to be memoized. For example, the compiler typically doesn't think of o.x as something that needs to be memoized, because it does not allocate. However, we want to compare o.x in the current render with o.x in a previous one, so we now insert a "memoization" (comparison, really) block around this value. The structure of this work is that we now add a reactive scope for identifiers if they originate from any instruction that could read from state that could have mutated between renders. This means that `LoadProperty` is always going to get a reactive scope; `LoadGlobal` will get a scope if we're not reading from something mutable, and `PrefixUpdate` won't (because the variable being incremented would have already been loaded and checked). Supersedes #30180. [ghstack-poisoned]
mvitousek
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 26, 2024
…values that may have changed between renders" Summary: Change detection is desgined to determine whether rules of react have been violated, and to do so better we need to loosen Forgets assumptions about what kinds of values don't need to be memoized. For example, the compiler typically doesn't think of o.x as something that needs to be memoized, because it does not allocate. However, we want to compare o.x in the current render with o.x in a previous one, so we now insert a "memoization" (comparison, really) block around this value. The structure of this work is that we now add a reactive scope for identifiers if they originate from any instruction that could read from state that could have mutated between renders. This means that `LoadProperty` is always going to get a reactive scope; `LoadGlobal` will get a scope if we're not reading from something mutable, and `PrefixUpdate` won't (because the variable being incremented would have already been loaded and checked). Supersedes #30180. [ghstack-poisoned]
mvitousek
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 26, 2024
…ctive scopes to values that may have changed between renders" Summary: Change detection is desgined to determine whether rules of react have been violated, and to do so better we need to loosen Forgets assumptions about what kinds of values don't need to be memoized. For example, the compiler typically doesn't think of o.x as something that needs to be memoized, because it does not allocate. However, we want to compare o.x in the current render with o.x in a previous one, so we now insert a "memoization" (comparison, really) block around this value. The structure of this work is that we now add a reactive scope for identifiers if they originate from any instruction that could read from state that could have mutated between renders. This means that `LoadProperty` is always going to get a reactive scope; `LoadGlobal` will get a scope if we're not reading from something mutable, and `PrefixUpdate` won't (because the variable being incremented would have already been loaded and checked). Supersedes #30180. [ghstack-poisoned]
mvitousek
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 26, 2024
…values that may have changed between renders" Summary: Change detection is desgined to determine whether rules of react have been violated, and to do so better we need to loosen Forgets assumptions about what kinds of values don't need to be memoized. For example, the compiler typically doesn't think of o.x as something that needs to be memoized, because it does not allocate. However, we want to compare o.x in the current render with o.x in a previous one, so we now insert a "memoization" (comparison, really) block around this value. The structure of this work is that we now add a reactive scope for identifiers if they originate from any instruction that could read from state that could have mutated between renders. This means that `LoadProperty` is always going to get a reactive scope; `LoadGlobal` will get a scope if we're not reading from something mutable, and `PrefixUpdate` won't (because the variable being incremented would have already been loaded and checked). Supersedes #30180. [ghstack-poisoned]
mvitousek
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 26, 2024
…ctive scopes to values that may have changed between renders" Summary: Change detection is desgined to determine whether rules of react have been violated, and to do so better we need to loosen Forgets assumptions about what kinds of values don't need to be memoized. For example, the compiler typically doesn't think of o.x as something that needs to be memoized, because it does not allocate. However, we want to compare o.x in the current render with o.x in a previous one, so we now insert a "memoization" (comparison, really) block around this value. The structure of this work is that we now add a reactive scope for identifiers if they originate from any instruction that could read from state that could have mutated between renders. This means that `LoadProperty` is always going to get a reactive scope; `LoadGlobal` will get a scope if we're not reading from something mutable, and `PrefixUpdate` won't (because the variable being incremented would have already been loaded and checked). Supersedes #30180. [ghstack-poisoned]
mvitousek
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 26, 2024
…values that may have changed between renders" Summary: Change detection is desgined to determine whether rules of react have been violated, and to do so better we need to loosen Forgets assumptions about what kinds of values don't need to be memoized. For example, the compiler typically doesn't think of o.x as something that needs to be memoized, because it does not allocate. However, we want to compare o.x in the current render with o.x in a previous one, so we now insert a "memoization" (comparison, really) block around this value. The structure of this work is that we now add a reactive scope for identifiers if they originate from any instruction that could read from state that could have mutated between renders. This means that `LoadProperty` is always going to get a reactive scope; `LoadGlobal` will get a scope if we're not reading from something mutable, and `PrefixUpdate` won't (because the variable being incremented would have already been loaded and checked). Supersedes #30180. [ghstack-poisoned]
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Stack from ghstack (oldest at bottom):
Summary: Change detection is desgined to determine whether rules of react have been violated, and to do so better we need to loosen Forgets assumptions about what kinds of values don't need to be memoized. For example, the compiler typically doesn't think of
o.xas something that needs to be memoized, because it does not allocate. However, we want to compareo.xin the current render witho.xin a previous one, so we now insert a "memoization" (comparison, really) block around this value.